Case 6012115/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Bennett v The Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset Constabulary — 2026
- Case reference
- 6012115/2024
- Decision date
- 31 March 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lambert Appearances
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Bennett
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis judgment determined only part of the pleaded case. The tribunal recorded that one victimisation complaint, identified as Incident 19 in the respondent's List of Issues dated 14 January 2026 and concerning alleged acts by the respondent's legal team and external barristers, was dismissed on withdrawal.
The tribunal also struck out, under Rule 40 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2024, claims it found had no reasonable prospects of success. Those were any protected disclosure claims based on Protected Disclosure 1, said to be contained in a report written by the claimant on 12 September 2022, and Protected Acts 1, 2 and 3 of victimisation under the Equality Act 2010.
The tribunal expressly stated that the remaining claims in the claim forms and further particulars were unaffected and would proceed, with full details set out in a case management order of the same date.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Victimisation | Dismissed on withdrawal: victimisation identified as Incident 19 in the respondent's List of Issues dated 14 January 2026, alleging acts by the respondent's legal team and external barristers. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Struck out under Rule 40 only insofar as the protected disclosure claim was based on Protected Disclosure 1, said to be contained in a report written by the claimant on 12 September 2022. | Struck out | — | — |
| Victimisation | Struck out under Rule 40 in relation to Protected Acts 1, 2 and 3 only. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 40 of the ET Rules 2024
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.